OPEN LETTER OF OVER 150 GERMAN MIDDLE EAST EXPERTS ON THE GAZA CRISIS

NOTE: During the recent war on Gaza, over 150 German Middle East experts addressed an open letter to Federal Chancellor Angela Merkel and key members of her cabinet. The letter received coverage by prominent German media outlets, such as Spiegel Online andZeit Online,spurred some debate in the German public on Germany’s foreign relations towards Israel and its policies towards the Middle East in general and Gaza in particular. The letter was further addressed to Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier, Minister for Economic Cooperation and Development Gerd Müller, Minister for Economic Affairs and Energy Sigmar Gabriel and Minister of Defence Ursula von der Leyen. In addition, it was sent to the German Bundestag’s Committee on Foreign Affairs, the Defence Committee, the Committee for Economic Cooperation and Development and the Committee on Economic Affairs and Energy.

Among the signers are Prof. Helga Baumgarten, a German political scientist at Birzeit University; leading members from the Centre for Modern Oriental Studies (ZMO) in Berlin, a leading German research institution on the Middle East; the chairwoman of pax Christi Germany, a Catholic peace organization; former and current employees of German aid and development organizations in Palestine/Israel; leading scholars and journalists specialized in the Middle East; as well as former and current employees of ​various German party-affiliated foundations.

We, German Middle East experts, are professionally engaged with the development in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. In the areas of science, development cooperation, democracy, peace and human rights we are campaigning in the Occupied Palestinian Territories and in Germany for the creation of an independent democratic state of Palestine, which can live in peace with Israel and its neighbours.

For over a month we have had to witness a destructive war, which shattered all these efforts and will for months to come, possibly years, hinder perspectives for development in the Gaza Strip, reducing hopes for a permanent peace in the Middle East. We condemn the use of force for the realization of political goals. The use of force against civilians is not acceptable, neither from militant Palestinian groups nor from Israel.

In this conflict we are particularly concerned about civilians in Palestine and in Israel, as well as for our partners, colleagues and friends in the Gaza Strip. Like all civilians and their families, they are experiencing a nightmare in that narrow coastal strip from which they cannot flee. The military strikes, to which 1.8 million defenceless people were subjected, have left deep scars and severe traumas with unpredictable long-term consequences. According to the United Nations, half a million people were internally displaced during the war; nearly 2,000 people were killed, more than 10,000 injured, over 15% of the residential buildings and 230 schools were damaged, 25 of which were fully destroyed; the already insufficient infrastructure, water supply and sewage plants and the only power generation plant were partly destroyed by air strikes. The capacities for medical and humanitarian supplies are exhausted, among other reasons because several hospitals and UN facilities were severely damaged by the strikes.

We are working and conducting research on the development in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, which according to international law comprise the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza. Over the past years, exchange between these areas has become increasingly difficult, and the freedom of movement for Palestinians has been massively restricted or almost completely obstructed. This also concerns the employees and the Palestinian partner organizations of the German and international organizations active on the ground, making it nearly impossible for them to carry out their development goals.

Particularly the Gaza Strip has since 2007 been subjected to a completely counterproductive siege which has forced the people into a fatal aid economy devoid of perspectives for development. In 2012, the United Nations issued a report entitled “Gaza in 2020” that concluded that with the continuation of the siege the livelihoods of the rapidly increasing population of currently 1.8 million people will be fully destroyed by that time.

The destructive siege of the Gaza Strip by sea, land and air must be lifted. This can be done under international monitoring, which would guarantee that no weapons can reach the Gaza Strip, so as to satisfy Israel’s legitimate security interests. Israel’s civil society has the right to live without fear. This is equally valid for Palestinians. Nearly 2,000 victims, according to UN estimates around 80% of them civilians, from which – according to UNICEF figures – up to 30% were children, must not be accepted through the claim of a fight against terrorism or the right of self-defence. The predominantly young population of the Gaza Strip (more than half of which is under 18 years old) urgently need perspectives for their future. They need better education, an end of the isolation as well as normalization and stabilization of the economy in the Gaza Strip. This would be an essential contribution towards the safety of the populations on both sides, since a purely military fight against armed groups – who are nurtured by desperation and hopelessness – will remain futile and, as experience has shown, brings about the exact opposite of the desired effect.

The realization of the two-state solution as the best guarantee for the safety of Israel and of Palestine as well as the self-determination of the Palestinians are declared aims of Germany’s foreign policy. To preserve this prospect, it is necessary to put an end to settlement policy in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, to boost the Palestinian presence in East Jerusalem and to lift the siege on Gaza. To that end, the Palestinian transitional government of technocrats, formed in July, which is based on a reconciliation agreement between Fatah and Hamas and which has accepted the so-called “Quartet conditions”, constitutes the legitimate interlocutor and ought to be politically empowered.

Hamas remains, regardless of the activities of its military wing, a popular political party. Dialogue with the political representatives of Hamas should therefore no longer be rejected: the balance sheet of the policy of isolation since its electoral victory of 2006 is sobering. Such a dialogue must include an explicit and direct criticism of Hamas’ unacceptable stance on issues of human rights and women’s rights, as well as the demand to recognize Israel in the framework of a peace agreement containing a binding resolution of the border issue. A precondition is that Hamas, for instance as it did after the previous war in 2012, observes a negotiated permanent ceasefire and refrains from using terrorist acts. Only through political integration and an enduring conflict resolution will it be possible to enforce the demilitarization of its militias for the long term.

Without lifting the siege, there can be no prospect for development for the people of Gaza and no chance for a two-state solution. Without a fundamental change to the status quo, the work of development organizations on the ground, in which some of us are active, is at best limited to short-term emergency aid. Billions of euros, which flow into state building or development, are misguided investments, if they are destroyed during the current or the next, inevitably pending waves of violence. This will chiefly harm the people on the ground. This also constitutes a negligent use of German tax money as well as a misguided approach towards development and democracy work.

We ask you:

to commit yourselves to a permanent ceasefire, which prevents further killing of civilians on both sides and offers permanent shelter for the massively threatened, overwhelmingly young civil population in Gaza;

to force Egypt and Israel to lift the siege of the Gaza Strip, so as to enable a normalization of the movement of goods and people, thereby guaranteeing Israeli security interests through international observers and assistance;

to provide for emergency aid and reconstruction work in Gaza, but not without demanding that Israel fulfil her international legal responsibility as occupying power as regards reconstruction;

to vigorously strengthen the already recognized Palestinian unity government, which was sworn into office in June, and its governance over the Gaza Strip and its ability to act in the entire Palestinian territories including East Jerusalem;

to investigate the killing of civilians before and during the attacks on the Gaza Strip, to make an active contribution to an international investigation and to support Palestine joining the International Criminal Court; at the same time to investigate the cases of the destruction of civilian infrastructure (such as the bombing of the only power generation plant in Gaza, sewage plants, hospitals etc.) that has been financed for years by the EU and Germany, and to demand compensation from Israel.

to apply the restrictive German arms export regulations to all the parties in the Middle East as well as to put under scrutiny the military cooperation with Israel;

to vigorously work towards ending the Israeli occupation of the Palestinian territories, and to make suggestions to both sides for a conflict resolution that are binding and in conformity with international law.

British universities have been positioned as central culprits for failing to regulate their intake of foreign students, while rendered dependent on “overseas” student fees because of government funding cuts. A pernicious new turn took place in summer 2012 when London Metropolitan University lost its “highly trusted sponsor” status, to catastrophic effect for students in the middle of their courses. Since then, universities have been preoccupied with managing accountability demanded by UK Visas and Immigration (formerly the UK Border Agency), and, in effect, have become its proxy. Academics at a number of universities in the UK and beyond have now become concerned at this state of affairs, and at the methods used to establish bona fide student status.

We, the undersigned, oppose the acquiescence of Universities UK members in acting as an extension of UKVI, thereby undermining the autonomy and academic freedom of UK universities and trust between academics and their students. We object to the actions of universities which:

• Use mechanisms of pastoral care, such as monitoring of student attendance and meetings with tutors, as mechanisms for monitoring non-EU students, or so-called Tier 4 visa holders, on behalf of UKVI.

• Treat UK/EU and non-EU students differently with regard to determining their ongoing academic standing.

• Construct and deploy systems of monitoring and surveillance such as biometric scanning systems and electronic signing-in mechanisms to single out non-EU students.

• Agree to monitor behaviours that may be unrelated to academic endeavour, and allow this data to be used by UKVI in determining the supposed legitimacy of non-EU students.

We note that UUK released a briefing document on 10 February regarding the House of Lords’ second reading of the immigration bill, in which UUK registers concern that landlords are required to check the immigration status of tenants. We urge UUK to go further and declare its rejection of the practices described above. We call on Universities UK, on behalf of member university vice-chancellors and principals, to oppose the discriminatory treatment of non-EU students in all forms and publicly affirm:

• That the quality of academic work should be the primary criterion for determining academic standing.

• That all students be treated equally regarding their attendance at classes, and that their right to privacy be respected, irrespective of their nationality.

• The right of universities to autonomy in making decisions on progression and retention of non-EU students.

Dr Maha Abdelrahman University of CambridgeDr Reem Abou-El-Fadl Durham UniversityProf Gilbert Achcar SOAS, University of LondonDr Christine Achinger University of WarwickDr Sam Adelman University of WarwickProf Nadje Al-Ali SOAS, University of LondonDr Anne Alexander University of Cambridge Dr Miranda Alison University of WarwickProf Louise Amoore Durham UniversityDr Dibyesh Anand University of WestminsterDr Rainer-Elk Anders Staffordshire UniversityDr Walter Armbrust University of Oxford Dr Andrew Asibong Birkbeck, University of LondonDr Sara Jane Bailes University of SussexDr Oliver Bakewell University of OxfordDr Bahar Baser University of WarwickProf Les Back Goldsmiths, University of LondonDr Victoria Basham University of ExeterDr Alex Benchimol University of GlasgowDr Mette Louise Berg University of OxfordProf Gurminder Bhambra University of WarwickDr Claire Blencowe University of WarwickProf Elleke Boehmer University of OxfordDr Maud Bracke University of Glasgow Dr Chris Browning University of Warwick Dr Lorna Burns University of St AndrewsProf Ray Bush University of LeedsDr Rosie Campbell Birbeck, University of LondonProf Bob S Carter University of LeicesterProf Nickie Charles University of WarwickDr Chris Clarke University of WarwickDr Rachel Cohen City University of LondonProf Robin Cohen University of OxfordCole Collins University of GlasgowProf Christine Cooper University of Strathclyde Prof Gordon Crawford University of LeedsDr Jonathan Davies University of Warwick Dr Ipek Demir University of Leicester Prof Thomas Docherty University of WarwickProf Toby Dodge LSEDr Renske Doorenspleet University of WarwickProf Costas Douzinas Birkbeck, University of LondonProf Elizabeth Dowler University of WarwickDr Franck Duvell University of OxfordJakub Eberle University of KentDr Juanita Elias University of WarwickHannah El-Sisi University of OxfordSafinaz El-Tarouty University of East AngliaProf David Epstein FRS University of WarwickDr Elizabeth Ewart University of OxfordAli Fathollah-Nejad SOAS, University of LondonDr Sara R Farris Goldsmiths, University of LondonProf Robert Fine University of WarwickTina Freyburg University of WarwickProf Bridget Fowler University of GlasgowProf Des Freedman Goldsmiths, University of LondonProf Matthew Fuller Goldsmiths, University of LondonDr Manuela Galetto University of WarwickPaul GilroyDr Jane Goldman University of Glasgow Dr Priyamvada Gopal University of Cambridge Dr Toni Haastrup University of KentJuliette Harkin University of East AngliaDr Sophie Harman Queen Mary, University of LondonDr Oz Hassan University of WarwickDr Charlotte Heath-Kelly University of WarwickProf John Holloway Benemérita Universidad Autónoma de Puebla, Mexico Prof John Holmwood University of NottinghamDr Michael Hrebeniak University of Cambridge Dr Aggie Hurst City University of LondonMarta Iñiguez de Heredia University of Cambridge Prof Engin F Isin The Open UniversityMatt Jenkins University of NewcastleRev Dr Stuart B Jennings University of WarwickDr Hannah Jones University of WarwickDr Lee Jones Queen Mary, University of London Salman Karim University of East AngliaProf Rebecca Kay University of GlasgowDženeta Karabegovic University of WarwickSalman Karim University of East AngliaDr Sossie Kasbarian University of LancasterDr Nitasha Kaul University of Westminster, LondonProf Rebecca Kay University of GlasgowDr Alexander Kazamias University of CoventryDr. John Keefe London Metropolitan UniversityDr Dominic Kelly University of WarwickProf Laleh Khalili SOAS, University of LondonDr Paul Kirby University of SussexDr Nicholas Kitchen LSE Dr Maria Koinova University of Warwick Dr Alexandra Kokoli Middlesex UniversityDr Vassiliki Kolocotroni University of GlasgowDr Dennis Leech University of Warwick Dr Samantha Lyle University of OxfordMr Paddy Lyons University of Glasgow Dr William McEvoy University of SussexDr Robert McLaughlan University of NewcastleProf Martin McQuillan Kingston University LondonDr Graeme MacDonald University of WarwickDr Alice Mah University of WarwickDr Maria do Mar Pereira University of WarwickProf Philip Marfleet University of East LondonDr Vicky Margree University of BrightonDr Robert Maslen University of GlasgowDr Lucy Mayblin University of Sheffield Dr John Miller University of SheffieldDr David Mills University of OxfordDr Drew Milne University of CambridgeLatoya Mistral Ferns University of Warwick and Durham University alumnaSian Mitchell University of Warwick Prof David Mond University of WarwickDr Liz Morrish Nottingham Trent University Dr Pablo Mukherjee University of WarwickRoberta Mulas University of Warwick Dr Simon Murray University of GlasgowGhandy Najla University of East AngliaDr Michael Niblett University of Warwick Dr Marijn Nieuwenhuis University of WarwickDr Patrick O’Connor Nottingham Trent UniversityProf Martin O’Shaughnessy Nottingham Trent UniversityDr Goldie Osuri University of WarwickDr Ian Patterson Queens’ College, Cambridge Prof Adam Piette University of SheffieldProf Alison Phipps University of GlasgowDr Loredana Polezzi University of Warwick Dr Nicola Pratt University of WarwickDr Rupert Read University of East AngliaDr John Regan University of CambridgeDr James Riley Corpus Christi College, CambridgeDr Stephen Ross University of Victoria, CanadaDr Chris Rossdale City University of LondonProf Paul Routledge University of LeedsAndrew Rubens University of GlasgowAli Saqer University of WarwickProf Derek Sayer Lancaster UniversityProf Jan Aart Scholte University of WarwickDr Jason Scott-Warren University of CambridgeDr Robbie Shilliam Queen Mary University of LondonDr Nando Sigona University of BirminghamProf Melanie Simms University of LeicesterDr Andrew Smith University of GlasgowDr Vicki Squire University of WarwickDr Samuel Solomon University of SussexDr Nick Srnicek University College LondonMaurice Stierl University of WarwickDr Mariz Tadros Institute of Development Studies, University of SussexDr Jacqueline Sanchez Taylor University of LeicesterNick Taylor University of WarwickProf Olga Taxidou University of EdinburghDr Andrea Teti University of AberdeenLisa Tilley University of WarwickLauren Tooker University of Warwick Prof Charles Tripp SOAS, University of LondonDr Mandy Turner University of Bradford/Kenyon Institute, JerusalemDr Maria Villares Varela University of OxfordDr Vron Ware The Open UniversityDr Dave Webber University of WarwickDr Polly Wilder University of LeedsDr Aaron Winter Abertay UniversityDr Nicholas Wright University of East AngliaProf Patrick Wright King’s College LondonDr Yoke-Sum Wong Lancaster University

Universities being used as proxy border police, say academics

Academics accuse UK Visas and Immigration of undermining trust between universities and students in crackdown

More than 160 academics have written to the Guardian to protest at being used as an extension of the UK border police, after universities have come under more pressure to check the immigration details of students.

The academics, from universities including Oxford, Warwick, Durham and Sheffield, accuse the Home Office immigration agency of “undermining the autonomy and academic freedom of UK universities and trust between academics and their students”.

Unrest has been growing for months as universities have come under more pressure to prove that their students are legitimate, according to the signatories, who say matters took a “pernicious new turn” in summer 2012 when London Metropolitan University briefly lost its trusted sponsor status – a requirement for all institutions wishing to recruit overseas students.

“Since then, universities have been preoccupied with managing accountability demanded by UK Visas and Immigration (UKVI – formerly the UK Border Agency), and in effect have become its proxy,” says the letter. “Academics at a number of universities in the UK and beyond have now become concerned at this state of affairs, and at the methods used to establish bona fide student status.”

Academics are being asked to monitor attendance and in some cases potentially to share emails with UKVI, said Mette Berg, of the Institute of Social and Cultural Anthropology at Oxford University. “We have a duty of care towards our students, and there is an issue about this undermining the trust between tutor and student. We are not there to be proxy border police.”

A Home Office spokesman defended the reforms to the student visa system, saying they had made the application process more rigorous and less open to abuse.

The academics say the changes come at a time when universities are becoming more reliant on the fees of non-EU students. The letter says: “British universities have been positioned as central culprits for failing to regulate their intake of foreign students, while rendered dependent on overseas student fees because of government funding cuts.”

Nicola Pratt of Warwick University said some vice-chancellors were so concerned about losing their ability to take foreign students there was a danger of checks becoming heavy-handed.

“We are a community of scholars and students, and those students should be judged on the basis of academic merit, not on the basis of their visa status,” she said. “It is a major concern that the government is targeting overseas students as a way of meeting immigration targets, especially as these students are investing a huge amount in thehigher education system.”

The letter calls for an end to the monitoring of students via sessions designed for pastoral care, and for UK, EU and non-EU students to be treated and valued equally. It also asks for Universities UK, an advocacy organisation for universities, to speak out against monitoring students.

“We call on Universities UK, on behalf of member university vice-chancellors and principals, to oppose the discriminatory treatment of non-EU students in all forms and publicly affirm that the quality of academic work should be the primary criterion for determining academic standing,” the letter says.

Nicola Dandridge, chief executive of Universities UK, said it was not acquiescing to the demands of the Home Office but had worked with it to make immigration compliance measures reasonable.

“We have been clear with the Home Office that attendance monitoring should not impact on students’ experience at university nor detract from the UK as a welcoming destination for international students,” she said.

“It is reasonable to expect universities to take responsibility for ensuring that students are engaged with their studies. This applies to all students, and not just international students.”

The Home Office said: “We continue to welcome the brightest and the best students and the latest statistics show that visa applications from university students has risen by 7% in the year ending December 2013. It is only right that universities adhere to the guidance and immigration rules of sponsorship by taking reasonable steps to ensure that every student has permission to be in the UK.”

For weeks, there have been an increasing number of reports of escalating violence in Syria. According to the UN, thousands of people have already lost their lives. And according to the international media, various plans already exist and are still being forged for a military intervention by the West.

Yesterday at the Munich Security Conference, Tawakkul Karman, the Yemeni Nobel Peace Prize recipient, justifiably demanded that international measures be taken to protect people in Syria from the escalating violence. Her view of the situation overlooks, however, the fact that Russia and China do not by any means reject such measures. On the contrary, Russia has stated that it would support a UN resolution on Syria if it rules out any external military intervention and demands a halt to violence not only on the part of the Syrian government, but also from the opposition. In contrast to the picture painted by the Western media, the responsibility for yesterday’s failure of the resolution in the UN Security Council should in no way be placed solely with Russian and China, but also to a large extent with the West, which for weeks has consistently rejected a peace-oriented formulation of the resolution.

As members of the International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War (IPPNW), also a recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize, we are deeply concerned about the large and growing number of victims of violence in Syria, including a great many individuals not directly involved in the conflict. Numerous physicians, as well others contributing to the care of the injured, are affected. We, as the German section of the IPPNW, also want to raise the alarm about an additional danger. A Western military intervention could set a process in motion that would involve other countries, such a Iran, and thereby lead to a conflagration in the whole region – and one which borders directly with Europe. If NATO becomes involved, this could even result in an open confrontation between the nuclear superpowers.

There is growing evidence that the domestic Syrian conflict, as well as the struggle for democracy and the rule of law, is being increasingly exploited and exacerbated by external players for their own political aims. Apparently, it is not only the Syrian government that has been supported with weapons, in this case provided by Russia, but Syrian rebels, too, have received both large sums of money from Western allied Gulf states as well as weapons from the Turkish NATO base in Incirlik. They have been supported by foreign mercenaries, including some from Libya. Many people in Syria and, in particular, peaceful opposition groups have complained that these developments have destroyed any prospects for peaceful change that have been advanced for years by the reform movement. The result is an ever-greater bloodbath between the parties in this civil war and an increasing number of civilian victims. Those who hold the view that it is legitimate to exacerbate the domestic conflict in Syria in order to bring about regime change in Damascus, make it easier to forment a war with Iran, or even to deprive Russia of its naval base on the Mediterranean, leave themselves open to the accusation that they are involved in the preparation of a war by proxy and thereby are guilty of a crime against humanity.

As members of the physicians’ peace organization IPPNW, we therefore appeal:

to NATO and, in particular, to the German government:Undertake measures to immediately halt the secret transfer of Western weapons to Syria! Clearly reject all plans for a Western military intervention in Syria! Embargos are also not a solution. Instead, attempt to bring about an agreement with all parties and especially reach out to Russia!

to the Russian government:Immediately introduce your own resolution proposal to the UN Security Council based on a thoroughgoing peaceful approach. This includes not only refraining from any further arming of the Syrian opposition, but also of the Syrian government. This requires increased efforts to initiate peaceful alternatives, such as international talks with all interested parties to the conflict!

to the Arab League:Resume your observer mission. And increase its prospects for success by appealing to all participant countries: Similar to the superpowers, please immediately halt all activities that foster violence in Syria and instead promote all possible approaches towards a peaceful solution!

to the Syrian government and opposition:Distance yourselves from unachievable maximum demands and accept negotiations. Only in this way can you prevent your country from sinking into the bloodbath of a proxy war fuelled by foreign interests! Stop the destruction of your country’s civilian infrastructure and stop all attacks on hospitals, doctors, and other medical personnel!

Physicians fight for peace.
Because war destroys life and health.
And war destroys human rights.
War does not create peace.

The German Section of International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War (IPPNW), Nobel Peace Prize recipient for 1985

On January 12, 2012, a bomb ripped apart a car in Tehran, killing Iranian scientist Mostafa Ahmadi Roshan and his driver, and injuring several others. In the past two years, four other Iranian scientists have been killed in a similar manner. By now, it is clear that this is a systematic campaign with political intentions. Media reports and political pundits attribute Mr. Ahmadi’s killing to targeted assassinations by those opposed to Iran’s nuclear program, both within and outside Iran, or internal factional fighting.

If public reports are true that these assassinations are orchestrated by foreign powers in order to prevent Iran’s ability to go forward with its nuclear capabilities, then we petition those powers to stop these assassinations – a tactic replacing political engagement with covert operations at the expense of innocent civilians. These assassinations provide the Iranian authorities with ample excuse to continue to suppress voices of dissent, even on the Iranian nuclear issue, to arrest and imprison political opposition, and to further curtail the activities of human rights activists.

As academicians, writers, human rights activists, and intellectuals, we condemn these attacks on civilian scientists. Such terrorist actions can only escalate the internal tension and regional conflicts toward a military clash or war. Regardless of where we stand on Iran’s nuclear program, we find these assassinations outrageous because they target technical or scientific elements of a society without due consideration for human rights, due process of international and national laws, and lives of innocent individuals caught in the crossfire.

These types of killings have to stop, not only because they harm a nation’s scientific community and its civilians, but also because they build a deep psychological scar on the nation’s public mind prompting it to ask for revenge in kind. We hope we are living in a better world than that. Killing innocent or even allegedly guilty people without consideration for their human rights and due process, by any force or government anywhere and anytime, is an outrageous act to be protested by all. If covert targeted assassinations of opponents become the order of the day, no one will be safe in this world.

The children of Adam are made ​​from a substance,
conceived as members of a womb of creation.

Once an injury happens only one of these links,
then his pain sounds immediately reflected in them all.

A person who comes to the plight of the people not brothers,
does not deserve that, he still leads the human name.

– Sa’adi (1210 – 1290)

If we speak out against the threat of violence from outside of Iran (the nuclear conflict) and warn against an air attack, we can not remain silent in the use of force in Iran, even against their own civil society. For the solidarity with civil society and peace in the region constitute the main objective of our effort. If we condemn the sanctions against the Iranian people from abroad, we condemn all the more domestic sanctions against peaceful demonstrators, journalists, trade unionists, professors, students, etc. This is beyond the government and its own domestic base against the foreign threat.

We want not only individually but also as a group of dedicated scientists of our strong protest against the brutal suppression of demonstrations and mass arrests against the manifest and peaceful dialogue with civil society urge. We urge the Iranian government to release all political prisoners in recent weeks, including all of the professors, and even with these qualify as moderators of the Civil Society Forum. Freedom of expression and right to protest – the cornerstone of Iran also signed the UN Charter of Human Rights – are now massively violated in Iran.

We recall that the built-up against Iran and the siege continued threat of force once again lead to a fatal way just how much by the scope for democratic development will be curtailed.

At the same time we oppose the unobjective and monopolizing representation of recent events in Iran in several German and international media. As a supporter of the Iranian civil society, we want to emphasize the genuine nature of the protests of the Iranian democracy movement. The protesters, who put together from all walks of life set, up for free elections and free speech.

On the other hand, produced some surprise, that even those who campaigned for crippling sanctions and preemptive war against Iran, by which civil society would have had to suffer, suddenly talking about solidarity with the Iranian people. You will only be convincing if you used even against the sanctions and threats of violence and for peaceful dialogue in the region.

Signees:

First Dr. Behrooz Abdolvand, Free University Berlin & Scientific Advisory Board of CASMII (Campaign Against Sanctions and Military Intervention in Iran)

Second Professor Gilbert Achcar, School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS), University of London

Third Dr. Arshin Adib-Moghaddam, School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS), University of London

4th Dipl.-Ing. Ahgary Ahmad, a founder member of the Association of Iranian scientists and engineers (Vini) in the Federal Republic of Germany, Berlin